Few Loud Resistors, Many Silent Supporters

Welcome everyone to another episode of Reality-Based Leadership Podcast. I'm Sy Wakeman, founder of Reality-Based Leadership, and my partner in crime is Alex Dorr. He is our Vice President of People Evolution, and we made up that title intentionally. At Reality-Based Leadership, we really believe that words are important and that language is key in mindset and eventually essential behaviors. And so we We stop talking about development. It's incremental. It's conventional. It's old school. It implies we're anchored in the present and we just develop ourselves. Maybe that we're self-help projects that need to be like fixed. Evolution, something completely different. Evolution is may we be evolved by the things we're involved with. And evolution relies not on leaders teaching and preaching. It relies on leaders integrating modern leadership concepts. Competency, integrating people's experience and learning. So we validate their experience, but we don't validate the sense they make of their experience. Instead, we integrate. So a little riff on Alex's title there. Welcome, Alex. I'm so glad to have you today.

I remember we're like, just put me as like speaking or VP, like of development. And you're like, no, no, no, no, no, this, we got

to

make sure this is reality-based. So I'm glad to be back and excited for this topic we have today.

Fantastic. And for those of you that are just joining, many of you have listened loyally to my podcast, No Ego. That's still out there, great content. Go back. We're just not filming more of those. Alex's podcast, The Carvery, still out there, great stuff. A lot of you are following us on LinkedIn, on, you know, Facebook and Instagram, and you might notice we're not out there as much. We have come back to some core principles we think are helpful, and that's places we can get to you directly. You can subscribe to our podcast. You can review us. You can share our podcast. You can subscribe to our newsletter. It's at realitybasedleadership.com/newsletter. We're getting back to— not that we don't love social media, but we're getting back to where you can have a direct line to us and there isn't a middle entity involved in whether we get served up on your particular feed. We think it's too important for you to have a mainline to the conversations. So Alex and I decided to come together and start talking about topics that come up that we aren't able in the moment to go fully into from the stage or from a training. So we get together after trainings and we talk through case studies, applications of reality-based leadership. And Alex, a lot of times we like sigh. I heard this, or I saw this. If we were thinking in our philosophy, like, what would we do to help? You know, that's one of our favorite questions. What can we do to help? This podcast is an answer to maybe this will help. And because we figure if someone's talking about this in our sessions or in the hallway after our sessions, that those of you out there trying to implement reality-based leadership might be talking about it as well. So this is a little bit of those deeper dives. We wanted our content— Not to be just a recap of what we trained you on, but a deeper dive, because we're into sustainability. We want you practicing this, and it's hard and messy, and we want to be a resource for that. So enough said, Alex. Um, I haven't been out recently. Thank you for doing all the hard work. I've been doing a few virtuals at home, um, and, and more, um, business development and content creation. So, um, I know you just came back from a big couple of weeks.

Yeah, yeah. It's been fun. And, there was a topic that emerged that I brought to you and you said, I think that's a good one to dive into. And, it was from an experience I had actually and it was one of those moments where you're living the philosophy within training the philosophy, which is always kind of fun. And, those you got to be ready for because you're kind of practicing what you preach and you see how grounded you really are. But, In this case, we were working on a particular part of the content and this individual was discussing it. It was a virtual environment. So they were just saying what they, you know, agreed or disagreed with. It was really good. We're just diving deeper on this concept. And then the individual said, I feel like, you know, we're talking over each other or you're not really understanding what I'm saying. And obviously for me, I'm like, I'm pretty sure I'm understanding this. But then I saw like just that, I felt that energy. that it just— we weren't seeing eye to eye and it was getting a little bit, um, both egos involved. And so I went to the group and I said, all right team, I'm open to feedback. Um, there's about 40 people on the call. Is everybody else not seeing this? Am I missing the mark? What are your thoughts? And so I passed the microphone to the chat or anyone to come off virtually because it was my way to do what I call activate the silent majority, or just bring in some more data points to see who's missing so we could find some better clarity who's missing the mark here. And in this case, Cyan, I'd love to hear your thoughts. I was trying to bring the other group in to help us both out because we were kind of stuck, and then it was just like 2 minutes of silence. Now maybe it wasn't 2 minutes, I didn't wait that long, but it was like no one said, here's what I am seeing. No one jumped off mute. No one said like, I think you're off here, you're on here, here's some idea, this will be helpful. And I found that was a really interesting Then it gets bigger for the whole group experience, because this was a team that's working together. Is this a pattern when one person or a couple are having a good discussion and we want some more input, everyone else just stays silent? And so I was trying to read since then what was really going on there. And, uh, so the technique was activating the silent majority, trying to bring the group in to get us some more information. And that was the response. So let's— I would love to talk more about this technique, Sai, and then maybe what's going on there.

Yeah, I think the response—

You've done this before. If I

know anyone else— Also, when we teach you tools, and I'll talk a little bit about activating the silent majority and the concept behind it, it's part of our business readiness program. A lot of times we go to use reality-based leadership tools, but we haven't educated the masses. And so we haven't said, traditionally, you're rewarded for staying silent even when you're in the majority and you don't necessarily agree that someone just took up 5 minutes of time in an ego battle. And I would really benefit from you Making a better set of data for us. Your silence makes it seem like they represent the group. And then when I ask the group, is this representative of you? And you stay silent. So my hunch, what was happening in that moment is no one spoke up, although they were probably slacking each other going, can she please stop? This is ridiculous. I can't believe we're spending training. They had meetings after the meetings. Like, that's the perfect time for one-on-one

coaching. You know?

Yeah. Yeah. The perfect time for one-on-one coaching. If you use a tool through reality-based leadership and it falls flat, It's either teach the group the tool. You don't need us to do it. Just explain to them what you're doing, the method to your madness. Or in one-on-one, say, hey, I threw a tool out there. It was interesting to me one-on-one that not no one said anything. You didn't say anything. And so I'm just wondering, it was an open-ended question. You could have said, I agree with her. I partly agree with her. I am confused too. I totally get it. I think we're off track. You could have said 1,000 things and you said, Nothing. And so a lot of people think they're only—

Just real quick, so you nailed it. I was asking, like, did I explain, or is people not clear on the concept? I was going to retrain it, or I was, you know, because I've trained it 9 years, I had never had someone say I don't understand the concept. So I was kind of figuring out after, I think I've done about 700 presentations, how I'm like, oh, I must have really bombed that one. So I was really trying to like make sure the group had the concept. So I was gonna, if that feedback hit, I'd be like, oh my gosh, let me start again. But there was, there was silence. So I'm glad you said that.

Yeah. And when people, you know, here's the one thing we're not coaching enough in leadership. When we turn towards people for input, direct input, and they abandon, that is underperforming in their role. You know, because the ego says, you never asked for my input. And so I asked for your input and then you don't say anything. And, and I'm like, well, you can't have it both ways. Like, do I need to send out an anonymous survey for you to tell me like you also don't understand it? Like, We need to coach people up on the fact that when asked for input, especially in virtual meetings, they cannot abandon. And abandonment is like leave you hanging. Like you go to fist them and they leave you hanging. I'm like, you don't have to agree with me, just don't leave me hanging. Like teach me another hand gesture or greeting. And I think it's where we enable lack of responsiveness. So if, as you maybe didn't have the relationship and that that the accepted behavior, the enabled behavior in that culture is that only a few really, if anybody, have to speak up. And so we teach a tool called Activating the Silent Majority, and we teach it to leaders, but we also teach you how to get others involved in this so that you can start getting better. Like most leaders, when I talk about how their change is going, they're like, oh, it's everybody's so resistant. And I'm like, I don't think you're reading the room accurately. I think you have a few resistant and then a bunch of people who are agreeable, but silent. The problem is not your levels of resistance. The problem is that your majority who are willing to work with you on this are silent. And where's that come from? If you went to American education and it wasn't like, you know, some of the more modern philosophies, when there was a kid acting out in school and you were the good student and the accountable one, you got rewarded for pausing, staying quiet, sitting quietly, don't add to the chaos, like just let the teacher handle it. And even if you tried to chime in and you're like, Bernie, stop it, they're like, not your business. You know, they don't want that. That's classroom management, okay? And you can argue whether that's effective or not. That's just how we all were raised. That's the conditioning. People think they're helping when they stay silent, but they're also enabling their own ego. And so what happens so often is in a meeting, people don't speak up, and then in the meeting— after the meeting, they either offer you support or they gossip about it, or they come to you and go, you know, I hated when that happened, and I don't like that person when they do that. And it's our job in those moments to teach them what a more effective role is. So let me give an example for people that haven't kind of heard this, and then how I might have handled that— not differently, but with my team. So activating the silent majority is after people in the business readiness pyramid of our philosophy, you Co-create awareness. People have to reach in and pull as much as you push communication out. People have to not be set on misunderstanding you. They have to come with like, I'm trying to understand. I'm like, I'm going with this. So that's awareness plus willingness, right? And as you move up that pyramid, we need people that are really into advocating. You can't just— if you are in a role, you can't just Stop resisting change. You need to. There's there's two parts of this, or two. I don't want to say two sides, but you are kind of with me or you're not with me, and it's not about me personally. But it's you know that third option is always one of suffering, right? So if you're in, are you willing to publicly be in? Am I going to see that in you? So one time I was part of a committee that did faculty. It was a faculty committee. I was just adjunct faculty. I wasn't even like faculty, but we got to go to the Faculty Senate meetings. But they knew I worked with a lot of external community organizations, a lot of companies, and they wanted to update their core curriculum in the HR Business School to better serve, to graduate people better prepared for the jobs they'd be facing. And so I'm like, absolutely. It was a committee, super On fire committee, like super good people who represented, you know, core faculty that said, this may seem like we don't need to teach this. You all want to throw it out, but here's why. So we had a lot of— we kept a lot, we improved a lot, and we weren't the decision makers. We're the consultants. So we went back to the decision makers, faculty senate, and we presented. And they're like, Sai, you're a good presenter. Will you present it? I'm like, sure. I couldn't even get my name out. And 3 of the 70 people started acting in ways that almost got uncivil. They're like, and you are? And why are you presenting? And is there anything in the bylaws that says that adjunct faculty can even speak at a faculty meeting? And I'm like, I'm Cy Wakeman, not here to take over Faculty Senate. In fact, one would say after the meetings I've been to, will never return. Like, I'm like, this is— Kind of a mess. But they said, you know, I'm just here to put this out there and then you'll get to vote. Good news. Listen to it. Vote, vote your heart. Right. And hardly even got through the presentation and they would interrupt and they would cite where that wasn't even possible. And it was really tough. And the more they spoke up and interrupted me and grilled me and the more everybody else, 67 people in the room, got totally quiet. And I wasn't very skilled in this, activating the silent majority. I went to my car and I will confess I cried. I was maybe 30 years old and my idols, my faculty that taught me, just grilled me as if I was presenting my dissertation or something. I'm like, what was that? My phone starts ringing and buzzing. Sai, I'm so sorry that happened to you. That should never happen to you, especially like you were one of our best students and we hate that you saw the underbelly. belly of Faculty Senate. We hate that you had to be like, go through this. It was not civil. It was unprofessional. Those are just the tenured faculty that are trying to take things down and stop change. They knew why it was happening. They understood the psyches of the faculty. They had— and I probably got 50 messages or calls in the next couple of days. And they're like, we really support you. We love the new curriculum. We're so excited about how we're updating it. This is going to be Phenomenal. So now the vote is 67 to 3. If you would have asked me to read that room, I would have said this is never going to happen. But it's a democracy. It's a vote. They were successful in just shutting it down, not because their opinion represented everybody's, not because they were so smart and so strong and so bold. They were successful in shutting it down because 67 people stayed silent. And it just dawned on me when they're like, we're so supportive. I actually said to some people, I go, I don't know how you define support. That's not how I define support. I was in there. You were on the committee with me. You loved our work. You weren't on the committee. And not one of you spoke up and said, you know, as for me and mine, I'm excited to hear more. Cy, can you go deeper into this? Or we're already doing some of this and the organizations getting our graduates are loving it. Not one of you stood up and said that. And their common response is, well, it's not my job to take on the resistor. I said, it's not your job. It's not even my job to take on the resistor. The resistor is handing you a tug-of-war rope. And if you take it, you are in an exhausting conversation. Drop your end of the tug-of-war rope. If a conversation is exhausting, end it and begin a new one. But how you begin a new one is that people who are there The majority liked where we were going, still needed lots of work, but wanted to talk about how we could. You don't need to take on the resistor. You need to broaden the field of data. Their data is no, no, no. You could come in with one data point. Maybe we could. I like this part. And what happens is, one, it is a gentle way to round out The true read of the room. It's a gentle way without taking on the resistor to transmute the energy away from why we can't to how we could. It's a gentle way to show the resistors that they don't have the backing and they aren't representing the room like they think they are. And so one of the things I've taught Alex and we teach is when that happens, when you're one-on-one engaged with somebody who's just maybe kind of set on misunderstanding this, like, Whatever the topic is, maybe tackle down that ego. Can we all relate? A way to do that is disengage from that conversation, end the exhausting one, and begin a new one. And go to the group and say, group, add in here, where are you at now? The group is so used to never being called to greatness like that. And I think that group was like, I'm not going to take on the resistor. I'm not going to— Like, Why? Like, I'm fine. And it's happening a lot on Zooms because people enable through just moving on and the silence. And so one thing I might have done differently, and I don't know that it would— there's 100 things you could do— is I might have said, that's interesting, let's move on to a different question. I need at least 10 of you to write in what your silence is about, because only you can know that.

Cool.

And so you just keep moving the conversation away from this obvious— if it's exhausting— David Whyte, the poet, taught me this: if you're in a conversation that's exhausting, end it and start a different one. Like, if we're in a marital conversation and it's like, you always and I never, and like, I always have to do everything around here— like, if you've had that conversation for 22 years, stop it and start a new one. I love you. I really want to watch a movie with you tonight. And if you could help me do the dishes, then we could watch that together. Then I start another conversation that says, I love that you help me when I ask. Can we work on you just noticing dirty dishes and doing those even if I don't ask? And anytime in the research that people ended the conversation, turned towards their marriage partner or their partner in whatever way you choose to in life, and started a new conversation, The Gottmans saw that turning towards and starting a new conversation was the key in relationships staying healthy. I think we can use that in the workplace. And so I would have done that. And then if I were the leader in those groups, when I see group behavior, I tackle it not by the group, 'cause it gets— they toggle down and get entrenched and then talk about you afterwards. I handle it one-on-one. So for that month, every one-on-one I had, I would say, hey, we had Alex in. I was able to observe something. He asked a question and I saw a lot of silence. Help me understand your silence online. Or, you know, help me understand your camera not being on during our last 5 meetings. And help me understand what your plan is to make sure that you can show up. You know, we're limited enough when we can't be physically together. Let's not limit ourselves more by not having cameras on. Well, I'm not camera ready. Turn your camera on. Like, as long as you have clothes on, I think we're good. Like, you know, can't show up naked to the meeting, but you don't have to be perfect. Like, if we're going to work informally, and I think we have to look at how we enable the very thing to happen that we don't want to happen, and then set goals. So I'm going to do a lot of when we have A very strong data point in a meeting, I'm going to do a lot of checking in with the rest of you to see if that's representative. I want to read the room better. And so be prepared. When I ask, you chat. And a lot of people, you know, get in that where it's like, I, you know, you can't demand that. I go, I'm pretty sure that part of your role is if a question is asked in a meeting and you have an answer that you could offer, that that's kind of bare minimum. stuff. So

yeah, yeah, there's so much. And I appreciate— actually, I wrote that question down, like, at least 10 of you, what is your silence about? Just dig a bit deeper. Because I got to thinking, I'm like, that— this is, this is the underlying issue for a lot of things. So if I could have stayed there, you know, maybe that's 10 years of experience versus 30. And that's, that's why the pay grade is different. But that's, that's great. So I'm taking that. I actually— in this, this is a random thing I've never thought about. In your story about the faculty senate meeting, I actually had some compassion for the resistor. And this never come to me, you know, in this moment, because if that's been their behavior for 10, 15 years, they think they got like the whole unit behind— they got the whole army behind them. They're like, everyone agrees with this. And because you stay silent, they don't have any feedback. Right. So they're like, this is— I'm representing my people. And if, if you're not stepping into that, that's the enabling. That resister actually have some compassion because they actually think this is like— and even in other conversations, they probably brought this up before. And because you just don't want to get involved in it, You don't offer like, well, maybe this is the idea there, or here's what I find helpful. And even in the, the one-on-one conversations in the hallway with that person, it might have been 10 years since someone had a different viewpoint just because they're avoiding that whole conversation. So I actually had a weird sense of compassion for that, those 3, because they probably thought they, you know, were really the voice of the group there. So I don't know if that—

I love that. And I have a lot of compassion for them because they're also in a role that was set up People have defaulted and probably gone to the, the feisty ones and had them speak for them all these years. These people have taken the hit. They've risked their career. They've been perceived as like harsher than they are. They've dug down into some positions. And a lot of people are like, now they're big and scary. I'm not going to take on, you know, faculty member X. Right. And like, we shouldn't one-on-one. We should in groups have more honest conversations in a group. So it's not personal. You're not taking them on one-on-one, like, I think your behavior is uncivil, which if it is, then we can handle that with professional standards. But the— we're also cheating them out. I would tell you we enable the very behavior we complain about. Mm-hmm. We enable that behavior. And it all goes back to the fact that we are underskilled. We are not victims of our circumstances. I used to just, you know, avoid or not visit a certain relative because whenever I'd walk in, they were like, Oh my God, you've gained weight. They were like so critical of me, and I knew they were lonely, and I knew they were keeping people away. And I thought, I'm— they don't deserve a visit. They're just horrible people. And then it's like, I'm a therapist. Like, I'm skilled at this. So I'd walk in and they're like, oh, you've really gained weight. I'm like, I know. I've noticed that about myself too. It is amazing to me during childbearing years how my weight can vary by like 80 pounds. And they were just satisfied as long as you know, you know, it's like you never come to see me. And I'm like, you know, I've noticed that about myself too, and I feel sad about that. So I'm here right now. Like, I would love to spend an hour with you. Do you want to play some cards? So what changed? I was able to not react to their behavior in the ego way. Now, did it change them as a person? I don't know. But it at least fulfilled my mission, which I have a value that I think older relatives deserve company and not to be abandoned. And, and you may not, but that's my value, and it's what I needed to have the type of relationship I wanted with that person as they, they aged. And so I think so much of this is we outsource. Like, I can't speak up because they're mean. Well, why don't you learn to speak up kindly in places where people have less than ideal behavior? Because evolve. Development is what do I say to somebody who's mean? Evolution is have compassion for the person and their behavior. It's not Acceptable, but have compassion for it and get skilled to be in the midst of that mess, um, with a lot of love and kindness. That's what evolution is, is the ability to walk through the world. And right now in cancel culture, people are like, I should never run into a mean person. I'm like, well, I'm a mean person some days. Like, do I call in sick? Like, I try not to be mean. We will be mean. We just need the skill of amends making. Like, we need the skill of self-reflection. Um,

the other skill. Yeah, the underskill thing just hit me. Um, it's, it's really a good point on what's going on there. And, uh, that situation that you said with the family member, it reminds me of this thing that hits my head sometimes, like the dog bites. And I'll explain. It's like I put my hand in there the first time to a dog that's just walking down the street and it bites me. It's like not really my fault because I didn't know it was a biter. But if I keep trying to pet that dog the second, the third, the fourth time and not adjust my approach, and I still get mad that it bit me 4 times in a row, It's no longer the dog's issue, it's my issue. Like, I still haven't gained the skill of like reading that differently. So it reminds me, as you walk in there with the family member, it's like, oh, she brought up my weight again. What the heck? Like, why is she— it's 17 times in a row. It's like, no, that's happened 17 times in a row. That's consistent. That's actually— I'd rather have consistency than randomness. And so given that, you know, I got the skills as a therapist, what could I do to respond to that? And, you know, it's not Ideal, but it's, it's so consistent. You

don't have to move in with her.

The faculty, the same situation, you know, and it, and that comes to our universal principle about change. Leaders are chronically shocked that when they roll out a change or a new direction, new strategy, restructure, whatever it is, that all of this resistance comes. I'm like, how can you be confused that it happens every single time? It's like, it's not—

It's built-in handling resistance.

It's like the dog bites. So what tool? I like negative brainstorming, and we can link that. Are you going to use to absorb their concerns and their fears with love and then say, these are just risks to mitigate, so let's complete the tool. I'm here for you. I, I validate that, that it's going to be different, and let's focus on how we could. And that's where you're not— you're upskilled. You have the tool with you all the time to absorb that with love, and it's, it's, it's there for you. And each experience will be different. It'll be different situations, but you have that, that tool to, to revert back to as an anchor. And so I feel like that's like, don't be mad the dog bites if you know it's a biter.

And the ego loves to get into all or nothing. It's like, oh, I'm a victim. Can't walk down the street. Can't ever approach any dog ever. I got bit once. It's like, no, work through your feelings and trauma of being bit. And if that street's important to you, maybe you can learn to walk down that street differently. Announce your presence. Don't stick your hand in. Like, We get into the ego kind of—

Imagine if you took that experience and never presented again. Like that would, you know, that was when you were 30. I mean, oh my gosh, it's terrifying to think about actually with how much—

Wrote off academic. But what we do is we cancel or abandon or both. And these are ego solutions. They're very polarized. I either have to stay and take it or I just need to be protected from it. And what if you got skilled so that you could be safe in more arenas, or you could be fluent in more arenas. Because I see so many people that I can't control reality for you. And yes, I will address behavior that's not civil. I will address, you know, some of that. And I also need you to get skilled up so that those things have a lot less power. So I can understand that someone raised in The '50s and '60s, when you think of diet culture and the conditioning that this, this female had, is very concerned about my weight. That's just her condition. I can have compassion for it, and I can disagree with it, and I can feel like I've evolved beyond it and I am more enlightened. All ego stuff. Or I could just say, thank you for your concern about my health. I've noticed that too. And just so you know, it's something I keep track of and work to make sure I'm healthy. The ego is like, I can't go visit, or like, there's no compassion there, or oh, so I totally have to accept it and just endure this. I didn't say any of that. I said, why don't we evolve you so you can move through the world more skillfully with more love and better decisions? Now, do I say, you know, Grandma, I have the most intimate, sensitive topic I want to talk to you about rather than go to my therapist? And I go, Grandma, give me your opinion on this. I mean, it's my most sensitive No, I don't. I'm like, I ask her to play cards or crochet or to, you know, give me the recipe for, you know, something she's had. And this is— all my relatives are dead. They're ready to call grandma. But, um, yeah, old, old story.

I'm gonna say recipe for Maid Rites, which could start a whole nother podcast. Is it loose meat sandwich? Is it sloppy joe? We won't get into that. Maybe vote that in the chat.

My grandparents were actually very wonderful, but there was an elderly relative that used to— and I found myself avoiding her, which is abandonment. And so many times we justify our egoic behavior. I'm gonna abandon, not turn towards, because you did me wrong. Well, if I'm consistently canceling people out or abandoning people, I need to look at my skillset and say, how could I move through this more lovingly, still have boundaries, and, and not accept abuse at all? But forever I was just like, why do people treat me this way? And I had to ask myself, like, why do I put myself in this position? There comes a point where accountability is not blaming the victim, but it's simply saying— You know, you know, maybe I do need to walk down another street, and maybe this isn't— I mean, I can walk down the street where a dog may bite me, but maybe I don't want to anymore. You have 100 choices. But back to our topic of like calling people to greatness, that this activating the silent majority is simply taking— for instance, if I'm an orchestra director and And I have 60 strings and 3 tubas, and the tubas consistently play louder. I still need tubas. They're still a part. I have to have tubas. I can stop the orchestra. They play 2 measures. I stop everybody. I go, tubas play quieter. We start again. I stop. Tubas play quieter. Now everybody's learned the first 2 measures perfectly. Everybody's super frustrated because they haven't even gotten to play the song, and I keep intervening on The resistors. And even in spite of themselves, tubas are kind of hard to play soft. And so I may be even asking them something that's not even in their DNA, or it's outside of, you know, who they are as a person. Like, it's not going to happen. I can end that conversation and begin a new one. Strings, I need you louder, so come up. Tubas, we'll take care of this. I'm going to activate the majority, the strings, who have to play one Tiny bit louder combined. And then they balanced the tubas. And that really goes into working with, you know, inclusivity and belonging and diversity. Like, you don't have to always change the people, but activating the silent majority is saying, what resources do we have to rebalance this situation in a better way? And we take on the tubas and we fire tubas, hire new tubas. We're like, everybody who plays the tuba is a loud player. Well, Learn that role, learn that position. If you work with engineers, for example, they were schooled in telling you how this is going to fail. Like, they look for failure points. Just know that about engineers and also bring in a lot of other viewpoints in your engineering team that said, let's figure out, given these challenges, let's transmute them into something different. Modern leaders take resistance and upcycle it. And that's the tool Alex was talking about, the negative brainstorm. Tell me all the ways this could go wrong. You think these are the reasons we can't. I just put them down and now we're gonna label 'em risks. That just upcycles them. And thank you very much. Beautiful contribution. Now with these risks, let's talk about their probability, their impact, and what's our strategy? Do we accept? Do we mitigate? Do we insure against? Do we, do we transfer? Do we, you know, what? What do we do with this risk? And then you get people into full potential, which naturally engages people because you're not Pollyanna toxic positivity saying, well, I think this all will be fine. You're actually giving up and— or you're taking what they're saying and saying it's true. And let's imagine how we can move through this different. But this is going to take one-on-one coaching. Each of our tools You can introduce, teach, and then if it kind of falls flat, and it will fall flat at times, don't consider, oh, the tool didn't work. Just consider, like, perhaps I need to do some more prep one-on-one with my people so that next time I bring a tool up, they're more ready to engage. And we'll do progress, not perfection.

You know, Sy, I wanted to highlight 2 things there. The fall flat. You— the fall flat, maybe the first tool, like on a negative brainstorm, I've noticed in my years of doing this, it does fall flat, although I've learned to trust it. Because what it just did is it opened up all those venues for those that I would say, I don't want to label them, but most resistant. They put all their issues on that tool. They're usually the loudest. They'll talk for 15 minutes straight about why it won't work. Everyone else is silent. And then when you cross it out for risks, all of a sudden people are kind of shook. They're like, oh my gosh, was that just leadership? Like, are we— is this moving forward? Like, everybody gets confused. And then you're like, well, what's the probability? I need everyone to vote. Just keep it simple. High, medium, or low. Everybody yell out loud, like, what do you think? And then you, you're talking about the disagreements because I'll never forget, I had a group of 200 on a software update. It was already decided. By the way, they're blaming IT, but it was Microsoft who decided this. So there's a lot of dynamics there. But I had everybody vote. So one table of 12, similar to your example, was so mad, like 15 minutes straight. They'd be giving me all the reasons why it won't work. And I'd periodically say, anybody else got anything to add? And everybody was silent. And so then we went into the first vote of what's the probability? Like, for example, I think the first thing was lack of training for this new update. That's a, that's a, that's a big issue if there's no training on it. And so we added it as a risk. And the table that was so mad was like, high, like in unison. Someone in the corner goes, low. I'm like, how are we in the same reality? Someone's low, someone's high. So we just started to discuss. And that's that shared pool of meaning. Yeah. Really good discussion happening. And you're just facilitating. So I'm like, why do you say hi? They're like, we don't have any training on the calendar. The person that said low is like, well, I'm in training and development, which I thought was helpful to have in the discussion. They're the experts in it. They're like, we have training on Thursday, Alex. Like, did you see the email? And that's where we discovered there's an automatic forward into the black hole of spam whenever something says training for Alex because he knows everything. So it ended up being a weird fall flat. But the one-on-one you're saying after is You know, going right to Alex and saying, you know, what did you learn about yourself in that experience? Like, it's that follow-up. And then, you know, with others, if they stayed silent. But I thought the tool creates that environment if you can hold it as a leader, because then you just trust the tool and it does activate. I actually saw that group disengage of 12, and then the whole 180 or so leaned in, and I was— you could feel it in the room. You brought everyone back in and engaged. From that tool. So I'll link that tool, but I wanted to add to that, um, that you brought, like, it will fall flat, but that usually exposes what's really happening underneath the surface.

I love that you say trust the process. I'm such a big believer in our tools. People get the concept, they're like, I love this stuff. I'm like, then practice this stuff. The reason there's silence when you pull out a tool and you ask like a question that ends a discussion and starts another one is Our tools have no home for the ego. So the ego, there's no, there's no column where you go, and ego, can we hear from you? Can we hear worst-case scenario? Can we hear how you're a victim? Can we hear story? Can we hear lack of fact? Like ego, there's no, not one of our tools has a home for the ego. And so the reason that it falls flat at times is people are like, I'm in cognitive dissonance. Like my ego has been convincing me, I've been believing everything I've been thinking about the fact that this is impossible, and I just got wind that it might not be true. And so what our tools do is they are able to bring people back in to say— we like to interrupt thinking. Bam, tool. They're like, crap, no place for the ego. Then it's like we reveal some truths, and you're revealing truths. You're like, wait a minute, training's already on Thursday. Alex, take the rule off your email that puts all my Emails into trash because you don't like training. It doesn't represent the real world. And so then it's like interrupts your thinking, reveals the truth. And then my job is to help settle your mind. And that's what all the tools do. They don't leave you hanging. They don't leave you in conflict. They settle your mind. And then we can agree on, given this new way of seeing this, which is really clear, you can find your part in it. Where's my place of impact? And then we can dream and scheme about something different. So if you're using our tools, these aren't— they're quick, but they aren't quick fixes. They aren't like, oh, there's— it's not going to be messy because you're asking people to shift paradigms without a clutch. You're asking that toggle up. Each tool toggles people up, and their toggles are rusty if you haven't been leading with reality-based leadership.

That's exactly it. Because and then a lot of people want like it's I do one time, for example, the negative brainstorm, and then it's done. It's it's agile. It's iterative.

It's we get a little bit.

We go forward a little bit, and there's gonna be new issues, concerns we didn't you know thought we planned for. They showed up differently. But the the the the actual freedom or the the um the soft spot for the ego is we'll just get into another tool. And that's where people can trust you, and they it's it's we can just start that conversation, and that becomes the cadence. That I think settles the mind over and over and over.

It is the way to settle the mind. Good mental processes. So anytime somebody comes to me, um, character assassinating one of their team members, and I go, timeout, stop judging, start helping. What, um, can you do to help in this moment? And if they know that's what they're going to meet, it settles their mind. If they know— another way we settle people's mind is let's get it out of your head. Out from the reins of the ego, put it out on the wall. It's conscious and visible. It's not gonna be you against me. I'm coming to your side of the table. It's you and me looking at reality. All those things settle the mind, and now we can have a new conversation. If you're not using reality-based leadership tools— some of you hear the SBAR and that's all you use. We have like 20 more tools. If you're not using those, you're not really practicing it because the first part of moving forward differently is inserting a good mental process. Drama is emotional waste. Waste, how do you get rid of it? Improve a process. If it's emotional waste, improve a mental process. A leader needs to get people in the right mindset, in their higher level, highest level of consciousness toggled up, and then together we can solve anything. But what we're not doing, where we are failing as leaders, is we're trying to work through hard issues with toggled-down people. Leadership is about helping people toggle up. Getting that access to people's higher levels of consciousness, providing a framework that's non-negotiable. That's where creativity and collaboration happens. We're trying to collaborate with 20 different frameworks. It's just not gonna happen.

Yeah.

Collaboration comes when we, um, have a framework. Like I was amazed when I started, um, recently to delve into some art and painting. And the first classes I took were all about like, The framework. And like, you need to know that eyes are, you know, not a third down, they're like halfway down. And like, I want to just learn how to draw. And the teacher's like, once you learn these things, then you go, you can be Picasso, you can be, you know, a realist, you can do whatever you want to do. But it's important knowledge to have. And I think that's really where we're failing our people in the wanting everybody to feel like they belong. We allow chaos, and that everybody can operate from their own operating system. If we were all on different IT operating systems, we couldn't talk to one another. We need to at least agree on a common operating system. One's not better than the other. We just need a common one. Use Lenzi-Oni's, use, you know, use whoever's framework you want to use, but use a framework.

Yeah. And I'd also say, to add to that, make sure it's visual. And I just, The— I, I feel verbal dialogue. The ego loves verbal dialogue and ambiguity, which is kind of all the talking in your 3 faculty members there. And it's like that, a lot of verbal dialogue if the meeting's all verbal. And like we said, the negative brainstorming or our tools or many of the others you just mentioned, visual out in front of us so we're on the same team. And I see that once you get them visual and we're looking at the problem together, that's when that silent majority comes back in and then the strengths come in.

Because they're safe, because they're like, wait a minute.

You just stay back. You're like, I don't even know if I said something. It's just going to go, or it's going to get like—

You're building on the facts. Like we don't have training. Most people are contributing their story, but when you start to write it down, people have to edit to the facts. Is that true that we're not, we have a high probability of no training? Well, the training group is like, no, we already have it scheduled. Awesome to know. Or let's say, right now, we have nothing scheduled. Good point. It's not that the probability is high, the impact's high if we don't train. So, what could we do? We'll meet with you next week and do end-user documentation and get training started. Like, most things are figureoutable when you get them on paper. If I give you a story problem verbally in high school or in junior high math, you're not going to be able to figure it out. But I ask you to take it to paper to show your work, then it becomes a simple math equation. And so, so many of us, are so into meetings and even chatter on Slack or Teams, or there's something so important about bringing it to actual physical, virtual, or paper realm. It really gives a place for the silent majority to give input, and it doesn't give a place for the ego to give input. It changes things almost immediately. Now, if some people are like, That table of 12. So, did they come along? Probably not. My tool's not going to take the people you haven't performance managed, who have been coddled, and who haven't had to play nice with others for 25 years and are your top performers that you pay the most because you overvalue technical skills and undervalue, like, the cost of drama. It doesn't matter. What matters is the other 100 people in the room came along.

Yeah. Yeah. I had a note that I forgot to say earlier, but it's So much of leadership, you'll realize how much you can change everything without changing anything.

Exactly. Yes.

I feel like in your example is just this tool, this, this concept of this idea of activating the silent majority. You can see a completely different meeting with the same people, same background, same— all of that can be the same. Because a lot of us are like, I just need new people. We just got to get rid of these resistors, or we just need better changes or different communication plans. It's like all of that, you can really shift this without changing much of anything, which I think makes it feel doable. You don't need to—

Yeah, that's the alchemy of being a leader. A lot of people are like, take your circumstances, bring it in as elements, and transmute it into gold. That's what leaders do. And it's not about doing and managing. It's about being skilled in focusing energy. It is all— I mean, this is Harry Potter stuff. We have a whole generation In the workplace right now that loved Harry Potter. What Harry Potter, like, learned was how to deal with energy and transmute it. It's metaphorical, but it— there's so many lessons. I just had 2 little girls at my house who I adore, and they're super into Harry Potter. And I forgot all the great leadership lessons that are in Harry Potter books. But—

That's so good. I didn't know that was coming in. But any final thoughts? I think, is there a reflection question that's hitting you, Sai, or Or maybe this is enough to leave with the listeners, but this was a fun one to hear. I forgot about that story about you presenting to the UNIF faculty. That's one of my favorites. So, anything you'd leave people with? I

think is really question your read of the room. You're going home at night feeling frustrated and feeling like nothing's ever going to work. And you're just, you know, swimming upstream. Just make sure you've got better data. Have you heard from your majority? Probably. Now, if it's a majority against it, Dig into that. They probably are telling you some good truths and adjust accordingly. But so many times the ego looks for the few negative outliers and then is like, see, I can't. And as a leader, you've got to have a better data sampling technique. And we think that's the silent majority. So ask yourself things that you think are dead in the water. Are you reading the room correctly? And really reflect on that.

Love it. Amazing.

Perfect.

I think we're good.

Good to talk to you. Well, we probably should end it. So good to talk to you, Alex. Alex is always like, mic drop, we're out. But on this podcast, we like to help our editor Tori with an actual ending. Thanks everybody for joining us. And let us know, we'd love some feedback. We switched over formats. We'd love some feedback. Are these conversations rich for you? Are they, do we skip a level? Are you following us? We're sending this out into the airwaves. Give us some feedback. And if you are helped by them, make sure and share them with your team. Be well. Thanks, Alex.

Take care.